tv Today in Washington CSPAN February 25, 2011 6:00am-8:59am EST
>> i've been a public servant for 30 years in local government, and you're right about one size does not fit all. one thing that will be impacting this area in the very near future is the designation we don't want to have, and that is the designation of becoming a non-attainment area, or just your this is arizona. this is a dusty place. we are being compared the same as a state that receives 50 inches of rainfall a year, putting in the same category and it's going to have some real serious consequences to our taxpayers as we are forced to comply with dust preventative measures, you know, when we're going to have the dust anyways regardless of what we do. the other thing is we need to look at that.
the other thing is fema. we need to be looking at fema and the impact that fema has had on designating certain properties within floodplains. today i spent a great deal of time working with the company that wants to bring three her jobs to the area. an area that was designated as a floodplains to a pretty arbitrary study, and at this point they are kind of wondering if they want to be here. we need to look at fema one size doesn't look at all. certain areas flood back, certain areas not an issue. although those are two areas i would like to consider. thank you. >> the same thing that i've heard from prescott, a navajo nation and window rock all the way to your comp the same things, one size doesn't fit all. it's also an unruly regulatory body that now has decided we're going to take it to you what's going on instead of working with you. and you're right, pinal county is a lot different than portland, oregon.
this -- isn't about time? one time ago i remember we didn't have -- i remember when the epa folks came out. we need them. that they were one of us. they had practical applications. they were one of us. they were helping the situation working in concert with what we knew of our environment. but now what we have is a disconnect. we have a disconnect with people that are educated but have no application on real life, real world situation. that's where we have to start driving. that's why i think the second of the two committees i was telling you about is very important. and that's oversight. this is to say we can bring them in and say hello to your adjudicating that, what is the difference is between pinal county and main? did you try to work with those communities? with a place equitably? it's not just limited to air
quality. you already have it going on at usgs, the subsurface water. it's in the forest service you are pleasing in your grazing land. it's a new energy and water, lots of water comes into the middle part of the state from the navajo generating station. have you heard the president, once again i was disappointed because picking winners and losers again. energy, everything should be on the table. not saying we're going to only go this way. and it's time that we came to the table with solutions that demand the regulatory bodies, because they should be answering to you. and that answer goes to congress because you elected them. so we must bring them back to the table and say how are you doing this? and if you don't, the other part from house is you control the purse strings on the house. if you don't want to go the way we express and the people expressed, you're not going to
get any money. so we have been spending time with everybody listening, and that is a primary concern as was her education. i want to get back into looking at that. right here. >> thank you for coming. my name is scott. living in a post-9/11, i believe that we need to do something about the security of our country, which includes the borders of the united states. one of al qaeda's main goal is to bleed our country economically. when the president of the united states says that we can absorb another 9/11, i completely disagree. we've spent so much money for our security, and al qaeda in my opinion is winning. what i would like to see is, we need to secure these borders.
we've got the numbers to prove it. lifetime people that have lived in pinal county that i know personally have set drug cartels have been coming through this four years. they control a sector in the valley. i know you know what i'm telling you. but what i'm concerned about is a few weeks ago there was a bug found in casa grande by border patrol agent there were people praising martyrs flying into buildings. if we have another 9/11, i don't think we can absorb it. and my question is this, if we don't secure our borders and the democrats want to have, they want to have amnesty or they want to go ahead and bring amnesty into this country, i believe that we secure our borders first and then we talk
about amnesty, if that is even an option which i don't agree with. but the democrats, in my opinion, should come together, secure the border first and then let's talk about immigration reform. when reagan was president, from what i understand and what i have read, he wanted to do the same thing. he gave 2.9 million citizens from other countries amnesty. and democrats ran the house and the senate, and they never held their side of the bargain. they never secured our border. so if they want, if we want to come to the middle, i highly come in my opinion, let's secure the border first and then let's talk about immigration reform. thank you. >> well, i'm going to go in three cases that way. one of the things that we did once we were elected, we had two meetings, we had to group sessions. one was kind of an orientation
of a figure out where you had to go, who we are friends, who were the people that were in your class, trying to get the staff. the second one was in early december in which we were starting to look at policies. and the evening on the first that we have a policy on terrorism and hotspots around the world that were of considerable interest. the hotspots, the first when most of us can pick out. it is iran. number one, most of us if we had to fix a number one around the world is iran. we didn't have egypt on our radar site, so that was exempt. but imagine the second one when the answer became mexico. arizona's line, they are lying. so there's an acknowledgment that we have a problem. number two is national security starts with homeland security.
the problem we've got is where the department of justice, we have a federal government that doesn't want to do their jobs. they want to pick just like they do in energy, just like they do and commerce and just like they else, just pick winners and losers. they want to pick certain lawsx= they want to uphold and others they don't exist. thank god we're pushing that issue forward in the supreme court because one of the things? our forefathers did is they gave us some balancing act. we have an executive branch, and legislative branch and the judicial branch. and we have to bring thatx/ judicial branch and the legislative part back to sanity. now, once again, we can dop/ everything we can from house. it's going to also be up to the senate. but i think the rational person is going to say, you know, i'm a numbers guy. i had to do lots of math and laws of science.
utb numbers and i can give you any question.x/x? but what you have now is you have a faucet that keeps going and it's not just on our southern borders. we have people getting green cards legally and then disappearing up along the imports. so what we have to do is have a policy that first defends homeland by making sure with homeland security, and it is not an option for the federal government. the problem we have to do is get them to come to the table to do that. i suspect it's going to go through the supreme court, and god, i hope that they believe in the constitution. god, i hope they have to enforce that. and last but not least i hope they work with people on the ground. we know a few things. we have the sheriff of the year. we have talented people up and down. we have ranchers who have been doing this over and over again.
let's listen to the people. let's adapt. let's work with them, and another one, howan our border agents not go through forest3⌞pñ service land? excuse me?.nnñnñññn i thought this was america. that's wrong. so security is number one. there is no other discussion. that is the first thing. then we will talk about anything else but that has to happen first. and i thank you. we've got a concerted effort across the board. and last but not least what i want to share with you is i've had delegations come across the country that said we would like to sponsor legislation, ask this of ministration to drop all losses. isn't it about time to drop lawsuits against the state? [applause]t>t>t> >> my name is jim kline and i'm not here to talk about
education. [laughter] >> i have a few points and i'm concerned about the budget, way out of control. i want to compliment you and the congress for first knocking off the first 35 million, and the second 35 million. but, you know, with the approval levels being so low, it seems to me that the people in congress ought to refuse any races and till they turn the corner of n. confidence and trust is built back in. sadly i think the members of congress ought to be on the same kind of health services as everybody else. [applause] >> it would put them more in touch with what other people are having to deal with. the second thing i wanted to bring up, and maybe you can verify here because i'm not sure i have all of facts and figures, but i understand that the
congress has for the past threeñ decades has been dipping into the? trust accounts that social security is number one, and is probably another 50 behind that. and all they do is put in an iou and there's no date of we not have to be paid off. and that is a real concern. i don't know how, if we tried to do that in the private sector, we would go to jail for that kind of operation. it seems maybe the lockbox has got to be stopped and you've got to put a handle on it after you get the budget under control. thought. you get something you can clarify for me i would appreciate it. >> yes. let's talk about that health care. i refused it. i'm carrying my own insurance. i'm a father and i have three children. i'm slightly above the average american family. and that cost me $1400. were as the federal if i got on
it, a little over 300. i guarantee you i'm going to make an example of that about what main street america is going through. oh, you bet i'm going to. we live just like you and us what our jobless. in fact, i believe is part of the constitution that no law shall be passed with exemption, including congress. learning what the laws or have so many laws. maybe we would put restrictions on them. maybe we wouldn't get down. what we have done to the -- the that create ponzi schemes go to jail. the problem of that is we have personal accountability, and where it is that into our regulators? where is that into our federal regulators? i'll give you another question to ask. it's been circling more and more, i've been hearing it more
and more where we have regular this a you know what, i've never seen a bureaucrat fired not making a decision. so i'm not making a decision. excuse me? wrong answer. the problem is that i'm one person. and we've got about 100 people, 150 people here? anybody has got to pick up a personal accountability, personal responsibility because folks, we are part of the problem. i hate to say it, so in my. when times were fat and sassy we allowed our liberties and our freedoms to go out the door. out of sight out of mind. so now it's upon us now to take those back at. it's going to be difficult because it didn't happen overnight. we have to dig and dig out. that's why i have a shovel. a shovel is a mantra for the average man and woman because it's a pile you are surrounded by. doing thing you can do is take one shovel at a time to get one if you don't pick up a shovel,
someone else will have to pick it up. we are beyond that point. the second part of your question, we have to start looking at what we do with funds. we are making winners and losers. you look at the banking schemes. you look at the scandal, the oil spill. was it greed and wall street? wasn't a problem of private sector? absolutely. but the biggest part of it was government oversight. we had regulators asleep at the wheel. in fact, a lot of the downfall was because of the federal government. dictating setting you're going to give a housing loan and nothing down. we are making enforcing markets so when i was asked the question, who do you fear most of any foreign country, any country whatsoever, a lot of the
folks that iran against said china. do you know what i said? i look in the rearview mirror, and the enemy was me. it's us. we are our worst enemies, oaks. make government accountable and that's why safety of to you hold us accountable. hold my feet to the fire, i'm fine. i'm from the west. i know how cold it gets. i love the fire, so keep on the pressure. >> my name is terry, and i am the pinal county director for the central arizona project. yesterday we had a meeting, and one of the things that i learned since you spoke about the navajos generating station, i do not fault you know, but some arizona project is 336 miles
announce that bring arizona's allocation of colorado river water into maricopa, pinal county and other counties, and most of that water ends up in pinal county. it's very important for us for one of the things that i learned call them, and regulate the navajo generating station where central arizona projects like federal mandate get 96% of all of its power to push that water uphill 336 miles, to serve us, navajo generating station, one of the rules they are trying to make is based on air quality and air visibility. and yet i learned this yesterday, there is no baseline. they don't have a baseline reading up, let's just say we got everybody out of there, we
got the power station out of there, we got the cars out of there, return it to all of its natural glory, 300 years ago, there's no baseline reading for what that air quality was. they are not going on any kind of baseline. and i'd like to see, not only the epa and a special with pinal county, where's the baseline for that air quality? i think it was already dusty before the epa canyon. and i'm pretty sure, if we all left, they would be dust. so one of the things i would like for you, as you are on these subcommittees and water and power and all these different things is to ask the question of, are we looking at what the baseline is? as a dental hygienist myself in the health care profession, i understand that we have to look at baseline readings in our own, in our own practice before we can make decisions about how to help our patients.
i just wanted -- >> you're right on the money, and that is insightful we have to do is i should be able to take the same parameter, be able to handle it to someone at it and you get the same results based on the same parameter. that's what we are missing out. we are utilizing science flawed. to give you another example more close at home is when i came out of dental school 25 years ago, i'm aging myself now, there was maybe five or six journals. there with very, very. review for the most part. he knew people trying to look out for the best interest, trying to make sure it was very good for the patient and have the best interest at heart. sometimes it didn't work. now there's well over 35, talk about power review. but what i would do if you have to look at the title, see what the fancy title is an go back to see who paid for it. because you can skew anything. give you another example, you've
been talking about how much is health care bill, obamacare is going to save you. they keep throwing out what they called the congressional budget office. the congressional budget office, it has no size. it really doesn't. it's not republican, it's not democrat. but what it determines is outcomes from is making sure you offer about seeing everything in the final. so let me ask you this question, if the health care bill is so fundamentally right out of why wasn't that doctors fix part of that bill? if you put garbage in your going to get garbage out. if you put quality and, make sure you get all the information in, you're going to get smart, rational ideas and answers. but that's what's happening. that is once again my relaying theme, you've got to keep
everybody seek accountable. and it starts with you. with me, with congress, and accountable. you've got a golden opportunity folks an absolute golden opportunity when its greatest disarray, the greatest opportunity for change. when there is no money, great time to correct it. use the facility of congress from oversight to bring those regulations to the front, and allow the american people to speak on them to give them an up or a down. let's start cleaning up our house. and we are going to have to do it in a fast order. thanks, terry. >> i'm dennis. [inaudible] >> thanks of being involved. >> our rich uncle, harry reid,
our neighboring state declared today that the democrats will not cut any budget or reduce the federal spending in 2011. how are you going to vote on raising the debt, national debt limit that is right on the immediate horizon? >> thank you. a great question. from what i've been telling you, what do you think i'm going to do? you know what? this is a recurrent theme over on the new members of the house. as well as some of the other members of the house. you can't just leave it to the new members. i am not willing to raise the debt ceiling unless i see concrete timetable specific cuts and where they're going to cut. [applause] >> let me make this perfectly clear. if you read the book young guns,
you will find out, i believe it is eric cantor, went with congressman boehner to the president about some ideas and trying to get this country back into working order. and as they were ending the meeting, the president made this following comment to congressman cantor. you know, eric, elections have consequences. think about that. seriously think about that. my job is on the house. i can take care of what i need to do in the house. i will put every pressure i can on the other side. they also need me to raise the debt ceiling. now, we all have a hope of
i suspect that most of them are democrats. i think you better look it up. they are. if i was on the hot seat, i'd be careful on how my leadership speaks on this subject. and what we have been told, you've got to raise the debt ceiling, the sky is going to fall, everything is going to cascade and fall. all the financial marketplace are going to fall, the world will go into -- the sky is falling. maybe it will, and maybe it won't. but let me point back to you, tell me what the federal dollar has done for you lately. tell me what the currency has done for you. tell me what the federal government has done for you. please tell me what ireland has done for you. please tell me what africa has done for you. please tell me what all these systems have done for you. no, this is a time to have that adult conversation. i've been reminded that i'm an adult.
yes, it is time for an adult situation. that i don't moment is now and i challenged senator reid to come to the table on behalf of the behalf. because it is greater than -- [applause] >> once again, documented cuts when they're going to happen and then we will continue. that's the only way the debt ceiling will be lifted. i don't know that it will be lifted very high. >> my name is eric. educating our children has always been a local issue. it's handled locally. as jim klein and i have gotten older, i really isn't as good at its it used to be. but i've been thinking for quite some time now, i don't remember when we turned educating our children over to the federal government. you talk about one size doesn't fit all, i just cannot -- jim,
do you remember when we did that? i don't remember when we did that. thank you. >> thank you. all of the things that have occurred over time because we we didn't keep the -- my grandfather always used to say, you become involved in politics or politics will dictate to you. i remember seeing my dad and mom sitting at a table with coffee, with senators talking about ideas, where we were going with water policy. i also saw my family get behind and derail part of the rate of her body in a small town in western wyoming. you can do this. folks, you can do this. you are just going to have to work together. you're exactly right. government doesn't know how to educate our children.
right now we are the second highest in the world for expenditure. do we get the second best results? absolutely not. the relationship isn't just about money. i can tell you that because i've got a wonderful public education from a small podunk little town in western wyoming called pinedale. my sophomore year, by -- they ran out of math and sciences and yet i saw some administrators reach out to the private sector, and agencies frankly where i got to work with, i got to work with the game and fish. for two years i got scholarships on it. i understand aquatic biology. i got to run the equipment so that when i went to college and the instructor did not run the equipment, i did. so don't tell me you can't get that kind of an education from a public institution. you better. i've seen it.
i'm the first of ten kids. and i see excellence all the way across the line. but there's also part of this equation that we are forgetting about. and that's a home. because you can't put a teacher in a situation where they have to feed a child. them teach, also have to do, the behavior modification. and you can't have the teacher making sure that they have done their homework. it's about getting back to family, and that is the last thing i remember with family, community. we all knew, we always watch out for each other and took care of each other and that's what we've got to get back to. that's what i see in district one. every single place i see, that's exactly the dream and that's exactly what is there. now we just have to live it and make sure it happens.
>> good evening. councilman steve miller. i guess this would be kind of a three-pronged thing. we need to update the epa, air quality control. >> thank you, everybody. >> those are all things i've been preaching except for about two years now. and just one of the added, the classic example of the administration picking winners and losers. and we have an air quality control director in this county that has decided to get rid of agriculture. so, i don't know, i don't know if he has his own garden, he doesn't need to eat or if he
grows cotton for his shirts, but it's a real sad deal. and i can go on about that later with your staff and discuss some of the issues in that area. but one of the things -- [inaudible] >> i do because it's so important. the first he thinks i've always been taught is what you need to do as a family. put a roof over your head and feed yourself. thank you. >> anyway, it's a real crucial issue and i think it covers multiple states, particularly the southwest. and so we will look into that further. probably the other thing i would like to talk about is the economy, and i know it's very difficult for the government to have anything to do with trying to spur on and get business going again, but there is an awful large project that potentially could come to pinal is there any insight on any of that or any discussion that you could share with us in that area? >> wow. you're right. there is a lot, very few things the government can do to get our economy spurring, except for one, get out of the way.
i hear some dissenting opinions i'm here to be a connector. i have ties in the railroad. my family were railroad so i learned a lot about that. is a major conduit especially north and south. i hope we can work that out where we can keep that project right here and i hope we come to the table working together because it can be an asset, not a deterrent. we hope that it stays here because if we're not going to agree, go somewhere else. it is going to new mexico. disaster -- did i answer your question? >> it is kelly. >> how are you? haven't seen you along time. the gentleman that was speaking
earlier, in phoenix for years and arizona is a leader in the country as far as school choice, charter schools and letting a parent makes a decision that is best for their child. said two things if you would just touch base on your philosophy on school choice and specifically the use of for the opportunity scholarship programs to congress as a caretaker for d.c. schools that might be coming up in the near future. >> i believe in competition. imac dentist. it works because i need to base my practice on making you happy. making sure you find value in the services i get and i am held accountable. we can have competition in our school districts that allow choice and accountability. you got me because we have to have that. the ultimate product is the student. that is our investment. we have to make sure those things and those parameters are
carried through. with the d.c. aspect, that is a project at that john boehner is very prominent about. and we will be talking about that very shortly. no deal carries back from one congress to the next so when you see that reintroduced we are looking at that and that happens to be one of the oversight committees that i serve on. but just so you know. in this office we will read every bill. you won't see anything about the bill until we read it. [applause] >> hold on one second. because i have a dentist and a beauty is in the detail. >> good afternoon and welcome
back. in choosing winners and losers, the administration and the epa holding all the corporations and companies accountable for air quality except one, gee. they have given them an exemption. and other wood like you to comment on that. the other situation is your predecessor did something that i thought was remarkable. she cut her staff by $200,000 and i know you have a small staff which is very well appreciated. but why can't we have the rest of congress do the same thing? >> we did cut our budget across the board. that hurts in our district. that is over $200,000. we are the tenth largest district in the country. we are bigger than pennsylvania. we have lots of road. i had to buy a new car because
all my cars had 180,000 miles. once again the federal government can't make winners and losers. you're exactly right. the health care bill, why do we give exemptions? all the unions got bypasses. holy cow! i thought great legislation included us all that we were equally in or out. here is our legislation. we have to hold accountable. it echoes all the way across the board. is not limited to health care or energy or oversight of air or oversight of any of the regulation including education. we have to get back to government under control.
>> i have a problem -- >> your name? >> yvonne johnson. i have been trying to resolve this for five years. i talk to two of your predecessors, staff, senator mccain's staff and senator kyl's staff. i purchased my usda financed home in 1984. it was actually six months after the ronald reagan administration drew a line through section 502 of the 1949 housing act that had sealed the interest rate at 4% so i am paying 11.8% interest on my mortgage and i cannot by law refinance my house into the program. the last twitter through john mccain's office, usda responded for him, has the audacity to say that i should be grateful that i
am paying only 11.8% interest because most of the mortgages that usda finance in that year were between 12.99%, and 14.75% interest. then proceed to tell us the program they have set up, we can go through this and mortgage it through a bank. that would sound really good on paper and that is what i keep being told. i tried going through that process. only $23,000 on my home and no bank will loan just that little bit. they don't loan money to for people. , most of these usda house. houses and pinellas county are mortgaged and if anybody bought a house in the 1980s, we have
been paying -- i literally paid over $100,000 that are borrow. two periods in my life when i was ill i had to take a subsidy. i think they throw darts to come up with that because they haven't told me how they figure it but my $23,000 plus these subsidies of $23,000 and what happens when you do a bank, you can get the subsidy wife out if you do remodeling on the house but to get a mortgage in the bank to do this remodeling you have to borrow the $23,000 that i know, $20,000 subsidy plus whatever the modeling is and that is too much and the bank will say no. pour people have to refinance through the usda. they cannot do it through a
bank. >> you are exactly right. i can't speak for senator mccain but what i can tell you is he has a problem and you are highlighting a lot of problems. let me tell you the plight of a very good bank carrying 39% asset mortgage. last year, three times with two more audits this year. they have money to loan in december. they did two loans. let me ask you that question. do you think big banks got the same scrutiny? absolutely not. what i would offer you is you are not alone. there are a number of people with usda loans. we have an opportunity. would you be interested in telling your story to congress? what i need you to do is outlined that issue, you talk to, the questions you want to
ask. i wanted the people on my staff to hear about that. main street america needs to benefit, not the federal government. >> anyone who had the usda home in the 1980s. >> we need to have an example of what we can do. if you do that, that will happen. >> two doors down, her father bought the house before i did. he was 93 years old when he passed away year-and-a-half ago. all the paperwork to vote usda and didn't process it. they wouldn't let her continue buying homeowners insurance on the house because her father was dead. and her pipe burst last night
and she and the whole ceiling collapse, the house is told in water damage and she is uninsured because she couldn't get the papers because the usda will and process them in a year and a half. >> i agree and this is not unusual. if you take the community i am from in flagstaff, not quite housing but shows the contempt they had, we have to show fire. we forbade private industry from doing it. we dictated everything. guess what happens? it burned. something is interesting about that. overtime liberal base sites are crumbling. over time it can grow grass and trees but does something kind of strange when you put a lot of heat to it.
it turns to a crystal. what happens with that crystal is it takes 50 to 100 years to breakdown for grass to grow in it. it is a volcano. and will fall 45 degrees. it has center of top soil. right after that we have a rain farm and guess what happened? we have 800 to 1,000 pounds protected by sandbags with national monuments taken care of. the federal government has been dumping had. what is that going to do? every time it rains begin delivery times snow melts you have a problem and you are ready to buy 1,000 homes. it has taken an 11-year-old little girl. the government is not responsive
to people they are serving. the lessons leader turtle tragic as they are, we need to learn a lesson about bringing back accountability to the federal government like you are holding us accountable. >> due to technical problems we are unable to show the last few minutes of this event. you can see it in its entire area online at c-span.org. >> it is critically important that the house move to avoid a government shutdown. >> we all have responsibility to make sure there is no government shutdown. >> was concerned about a possible government shutdown see what was said when the federal government shutdown in 1995 on line at the c-span video library with every program since 1987. surge, watch, clip and share.
>> several events to tell you about. the national press foundation host a forum on the federal budget which staff members of the house budget committee, that is on c-span3 at 9:00 eastern. the institute of peace will focus on afghan national security forces in a discussion that will include the afghan defense and interior ministers. you can see that on c-span2. at 2:00 p.m. eastern democratic governors' association looks at job creation. in panel discussions that will include union leaders and presidents and ceos of several companies. >> sunday on road to the white house arkansas governor and presidential candidate mike huckabee on his current book a simple government. the shares bought on president obama, social and fiscal issues and his run for the 2012 election as the gop deal takes shape. watch road to the white house
sunday at 6:30 and 9:40 eastern and pacific. >> with congress in recess at a march 4th deadline for funding the federal government see what house members said about funding the rest of this fiscal year spread over four days, with 162 amendments considered. the entire debate is on line at c-span congressional chronicle with timeline and transcripts of every session at c-span.org/congress. >> up next a news conference with members of the conference of mayors on cuts to the community development grant program. in a spending bill passed last week. that measure would cut 60% of the grant program. this is about a half hour. >> good morning.
thank you for being with us. before we begin a would like to have all the mayors present here introduce themselves and other cities they serve. i am elizabeth couch of burnsville and president of the congress of mayors. >> i am mayor of philadelphia, second vice president of the u.s. conference of mayors. >> mayor of oklahoma city. >> mayor of the council. >> christopher kowalski of virginia. >> north carolina. >> the mayor of new york. >> mayor of massachusetts. >> des moines, iowa. >> georgia. >> arizona. >> atlanta. >> mayor of the city of
davenport. >> anthony hawks of north carolina. >> robert johnson of jackson, mississippi. >> mayor in indiana. >> little rock, arkansas. >> south carolina. >> city of trend in. >> north miami, florida. >> mayor of the city of tallahassee, florida. >> massachusetts and share of community development and housing committee. >> thank you for being here this morning. we are here as mayors representing cities. we are not partisan. we are disappointed about programs that are critical to cities like the community development grants and that is being cut. there are other programs that are critical to cities that are
also on the cut list. we take great exception to the community development block grant. this program was promulgated under president richard nixon. this program comes directly to cities for us to have control of the funds and to ensure that the funds are used for those folks who most need them and to help with projects for the people who are in need of housing, whether that is affordable housing, section 8 housing and so forth. it creates jobs, not just for people within city hall but for the private sector and for non-profits. this program is important to our
citizens. if members of congress had not thought about the impact that these kind of cuts have on the members of our community, they need to know about them. therefore it is going to be our responsibility to educate them and to make them aware of what the impact are not only on the cost side but on the city level, also on the side of the people who are affected. because impacts are devastating. and therefore as we stand here today knowing what happened in the house, we see that our all only hope is in the senate. we had met to talk about what we are going to do and how we are going to effect that, and of
discussion. we balance our budgets every year. we also are very transparent. what we believe happened in the house was not transparent and so we are here to raise felices for the peoplevoices for the people affected by these cuts. it will affect the rest of the people of our community because it shifts. ladies and gentlemen, every year the people of our community who worked in our communities send money to washington and to that treasury. nothing comes back to us.
the community block grants brings back some of those funds to our city that we can help with the social issues that we deal with on that day to day basis and so these drastic cuts are unacceptable to the mayors of america. and today as non-partisan mayor's we have raise our voices and with that i am going to also call on our second vice president, michael nutter from philadelphia. mr vice-president? >> thank you very much and to all mayors who are here, all the members of the u.s. conference of mayors. i can only think of one word to describe what the house has done, outrageous. outrageous and unacceptable. it is an american. it attacks senior citizens. attacks children and working
people. it stops jobs and economic development. cities all across the united states. i have no idea what is going on in the minds of some who have gotten elected on rhetoric and are trying to govern with the same rhetoric. you cannot run a country while attacking its own people. certainly that should not be going on in the united states and that is what it is all about. it attacks programs for seniors. attacks programs for children. it takes and takes desperately needed funds away from the ones who need it the most. this is literally an american what is going on. the u.s. conference of mayors will not stand for this activity and we have to do a better job of educating members of the united states congress about the programs that they fund and support on a regular basis. it is clear to us that many members have no idea what these
programs do or how they affect people or rebuild our cities and put americans back to work. in addition to running our cities on a regular basis, and educate members what they will do. they will not stand for this kind of attack on our own citizens. thank you, madam president. >> thank you. the greatest generation of americans, world war ii, helped to build this country. we are facing a crisis in our city. we have to take a stand. this generation has to take a stand. i am not just talking about mayors. we listened to a lot of different mayors in the meeting. one of them that spoke of was the mayor of charlotte his spoke of 3,000 children who go to bed
at night without debt, without food, people who are unemployed. we are in the worst economic recession this country has seen in decades. over 9% unemployment the chris turtle at a time when our most vulnerable in our society can't seem to find a job, can't seem to keep their home. we have a continuing resolution which cuts funding the purchase lifeblood of cities and towns. this is devastating to the people we're talking about this morning. to young people we talk about. to citizens who need accessibility. we have to engage our members of the house and senate,
public-sector, and can stand. we're in a critical juncture. i will give it back to the president. there has been a lot of talk about the deficit -- deficit reduction. we have to prioritize in our country today. we have to make some difficult decisions. we have to ensure that we don't balance our budget on the backs of those most vulnerable. that is what a this age are 1 does. we can't stand for it. we have to engage everyone in the community. what is the best thing about this funding? it leverages other funds and jobs, private sector and public sector, non-profit.
we have to make sure we are engaging every element of our community so that we don't see the devastation that has been proposed by the house. that is why i am here and we have to get activated as mayors across the country. >> thank you. >> to me if this is about hypocrisy. it is hypocritical for elected officials in washington to say they value cities and the economy and jobs and then create a stimulus package and send it to the states where it never reaches the city's. is hypocritical to say you value the economy and cities and jobs and then go make drastic cuts to great programs like community development block grants which have great discretionary opportunities to go where they are needed in our community. we understand tough choices. they are in not a single mayor here not making tough choices right now. we are weighing the value of
police officers and firefighters and libraries but it is also about priorities. the priorities in washington need to be about cities and jobs and the economy. if these proposals go through those are not the priorities. >> thank you. >> who are we today before you? we are the united states conference of mayors. you have described as as the city fathers and city mothers of this great nation. what do city fathers in any family do? they try to lookout for what is in the best interest of their family and members of their communities. as mayors we are on the forefront. we are where the rubber hits the road. what other group knows better than the needs of our community? we are here to tell you today that as city fathers and city
mothers we are going to get our families together. the folks in the community that represent these organizations that work day in and day out for average people in this country whether it be day care provider source housing interests or other individuals. we will get them together and take the leadership as the united states conference of mayors because who else can or should but us? we will bring them to washington and have a major march or meeting in the halls of congress with vote leadership of congress. we will take this fight to save and protect community development block grants to the white house and halls of congress and we are not going to let them destroyed this fundamental basic program that has served this program for 30 years a new and take that to the bank and tell congressman, democrat and republican alike, president and otherwise that
this will not be allowed to stand and that is coming from the city fathers and city mothers of this country who really know what is best for their local communities. thank you. [applause] >> our last major is mayor smith. >> we are trying to get mayor l gluba to come out of his shell a little bit. there was quite a bit of -- united and committed to this. behind me are ladies and gentlemen who make tough choices. the main thing about cutting the cbdg is if you cut a budget in washington somehow the problem disappears.
it does not. who is going to pick up the slack. that fall upon cities. this is merely a cost shift. a shifting of responsibility that we spoke about from the federal government to handle societal problems. cities will take care of it. to take a disadvantage of citizens. this will have direct impact on our citizens. we have continued to balance the budgets. we have continued to make those tough decisions. this is an atrocity because it ignores the fact that you can't simply wish away problems. we will stand together and fight this because this is one of the most basic principles that we believe in and it also does affect our citizens on a daily basis. it will affect their daily lives and quality of life and the level of services we are able to provide. ..
>> directly address boehner and mitch mcconnell, give them the gist of what you'd say to their face. >> mayor elizabeth kautz from the city of burnsville, minnesota. we are nonb partisan, and that is the beauty of standing together here as the u.s. conference of mayors is that we are nonpartisan. and so this issue is an issue that has been debated in congress many times and has had bipartisan support. as mayors serving our citizens,
we serve both democrats and republican. but i will open it up to any of the mayors here to see if they're willing to speak. because as we stand together, we don't know who's a democrat or a republican. >> and don't care. >> and we don't care. >> it really doesn't matter. >> i'll be glad -- >> yeah. >> i'm mick cornett, the mayor of oklahoma city. what, specifically, is your question? [laughter] >> how many of you would identify yourself as republican and, if so, directly address your message to boehner and mcconnell. >> well, you heard from three republicans during that, during that last series of tirades. >> that's right. >> from mayors. [laughter] and i don't know that we need to address anyone specifically because sparse -- as far as we're concerned, they represent the country. but they've got to hear from us. and it's a little bit lame for us to hear they've got tough
choices to make. let me tell you, you be a mayor for a day, and i'll tell you about some tough choices. >> yes. [laughter] >> this is about priorities, and the priorities need to be about the economy, and if they start cutting community development block grants, they have lost their sense of priority. >> yeah. >> hello, i'm brenda lawrence, and i'm the chair of the democratic mayors, and i can tell you that mayor cornett and i stand side by side on these issues, and we can walk the halls of congress together on that because this is something we've talked about. it's about the children, it's about programs that, ironically, were started by a republican president. and this has been a program that all of us, all of us can take you and put your hands right on the results of these programs. and so we stand together on this. we may talk about other issues, but as mayors, we don't have a d or an r on it, and the community
development black grants are about the people of this country, and we stand together on that. >> thank you, mayor. yes, sir. >> house of representatives has done, but president obama also in his 2012 budget has proposed cutting -- >> we talk about the '12 budget because th issue of urgency is the continuing resolution that's before us right now. that's a huge cut. because then if that money is cut, then the '12 budget goes to that baseline. there's nothing left. it's gone. >> you have no opinion on the '12 budget? >> we need to fight this budget and win this one. mayor, did you have a -- >> we're not going to get distracted. >> that's right. >> by '12 while we're live anything '11. that's the issue. 62.5% cut is something that you really do have to pay attention to, we'll deal with '12 when we get to '12. we're in '11. so, you know, when someone has a
bazooka pointed right at your head, or it's a little difficult to focus on what you're going to have for breakfast tomorrow. we're focused on the here and now. this program is under attack and many, many others as our president indicated, but at 62.5%, we have to stay focused on where we are right here at the moment. that's what we're doing. >> yes, sir. >> is this first time in the history of the block grant that there has been a strenuous effort to eliminate that funding, and what happened many that case? >> no, this is not the first time. we have gone down this road many times before, and i believe that our executive officer can tell you how many times. tom cochran, how many times the conference of mayors have fought this fight on the community block grant. >> most serious -- >> can you come to the -- >> yeah.
yeah, i think it's important to stop and look at every president since nixon. and if you -- president reagan proposed cuts, and we won. president bush tried to eliminate the program, and with the help of his secretary of hud, mr. jackson, we saved it. so this, this is not the first time. so, but this, i think, is -- >> serious. >> more serious and more critical than ever what we're living with right now. >> anyone else? yes. >> one of the criticisms of the program is that it's difficult to measure its -- >> [inaudible] >> and that's not the republicans saying that, that's what the president says in his budget. what's your response to his criticisms? >> well, it's very interesting that -- because it is a flexible program, and we always want to ask the question and we have asked the question, where do you start the measure?
because we can talk about, mayor fox can tell you about the 3,000 children underneath the bridge. and if we can get those 3,000 children. that's today. what about next year when we have to look at something? it's very organic. so we're -- and it's a flexible program, and we need to make sure that we have, we address these issues. and did i hear you, mayor warren? >> we have to account for every dime, okay? >> yes. >> every dime of this program gets accounted for, is spent well. this is a 36-year-old program, never an issue, never a scandal, no one's doing anything, you know, all our bridges in our cities go somewhere and people use them. [laughter] so, i mean, all this talk about, well, this measure, that measure, we could talk about jobs, we we could -- go talk toa senior citizen who's live anything a hud 202 development
building. ask them. ask the child care folks, what's the outcome when kids are in a safe, secure environment because they got funded with cdbg? some of the streets folks drive on were probably funded with cdbg dollars. the great thick about this program is -- thing about this program is tremendous flexibility. we fill out more forms than we know what to do with at home, so we actually know what's going on. and some of the folks go to groundbreakings and ribbon cuttings don't even know some of those are funded by cdbg. we know where every dollar and dime goes with this program, and the members of congress need to figure it out themselves. >> can i just add, i just want to add to that. we know over a quarter of a million jobs in the last six years have been retained or created by cdbg funding. we know that there have been
over 14 million people that have been affected, their lives have been affected by cdbg funding. so we can talk about data, and we can also talk about the lives, infrastructure that's been affected by this president obama allows for innovation for the chief executive officers of our country in and around the country to leverage and be creative. so i wanted to make sure that was noted as well. >> yes. >> one other thing that i think needs to be pointed out is this is probably the most transparent programs there is. mesa is not unlike other cities where cdbg funds are subject to a very extensive process. we have three citizens' committees, two subcommittees the committee as the whole. it is probably the most responsive and the most purely
citizen-driven spending program almost in all of government. it far exceeds even our normal budget process. so there is not only accountability, there's transparency, and it is one of those things that, i'll tell you, you will truly note the impact of cdbg when it's gone. >> yeah. and, and to the point that if they want a measure, we have forms that we have to fill out, and they're extensive forms. so if they want to create measurements, hey, bring it on. [laughter] yes, sir. >> are you -- [inaudible] for the energy efficiency conservation block grant program or are these meetings solely focused on cdbg? >> right now we're focused on the bazooka. [laughter] this is cdbg. that's another fight we have of to address, but right now this is in our face. anyone else? yeah, please. mayor stoltz.
let them know -- >> i just want to give you a small example of the leverage of funds for community development block grants. just like most communities, the poor and elderly who are homeowners are in danger of losing their homes because their roofs are caving in, their porches are caving in. we took $27,000 of community development block grant money, and we established an account at lowe's home improvement. we had over a thousand volunteers come and go to that home improvement place, buy the plywood, buy the roofing materials, and they have renovated 87 homes of the poor and elderly at a value of over a million dollars in improvements that not only improve the homes of these poor and elderly people, 87 families, but leverage the money from $27,000 worth of money to a million
dollars worth of profit and kept the tax base there and kept people in their homes. now, with that small amount of money we were leveraged greatly with being automobile to do that -- able to do that. so when you start talking about accountability, those are the kinds of things that keep our communities thriving. so when you start to talk about taking this away from the disenfranchised, it is totally un-american. >> anyone else? anyone else? >> from an ea event with the nation's governors to a live event this morning with the nation's governors who are gathering here in washington. the national group meets this weekend, and democrats are meeting today. several will be meeting with president obama later today at the white house discussing the economy and unemployment. this is live coverage on c-span2. >> martin o'malley and republican governor association chairman rick perry, the governor of texas. we're going to have a conversation here ha's going to
be led by jonathan martin, affection atly known as j. mart. there's cards by your chairs where you can write questions and ask them of the governors later in the day, and also there's information for the hash tag which is state solutions to engage in the conversation on twitter. so i'll turn it over to jay martin. thank you, governors. >> thanks so much for coming today, joining us on a rainy morning in washington. let's get straight to the news this week and that is, of course, what is taking place in wisconsin, in madison. governor o'malley, i want to start with you. what lessons do you take away from what has happened in madison, looking at the standoff that is now going into its second week? >> i guess the lesson i'd take is one i learned when i was mayor of the city of baltimore. when you're facing tough challenges, when you have to overcome things, i think it's
best to bring people together to do that. and i think when you try to vilify or make one side of the equation the enemy, i think you're asking for trouble. look, we all know that we have to go through a time of readjustment, but i think the best way to do that is to bring people together. ironically, you know, we're asking our public employees in maryland for many of the same -- >> i was about to get to that, yeah. >> we're not asking them to give up their right to organize or have their voices heard. >> because the pension plan in maryland is having some real problems. >> right. we inherited two big deficits, if you will. one was on the operating side, the other was with the imbalances in the pension system. we're asking our public employees -- and they're not happy about it, but they're staying at the table -- we're asking them to pay more in its contribution, the state will pay more in its contribution, but these are the things we need to do in order to be fiscally responsible and move our state forward. >> governor perry, is governor walker doing the right thing in
wisconsin, and if you had any advice for him, what would you say? >> well, the key for us is, you know, we've got 50 laboratories of innovation out there. i hope all of you have bought the book, "fed up," and absorbed the -- >> very fast plug. >> you'll hear it more than once. [laughter] but my, my point is that we're 50 different laboratories and, frankly, you know, for me to tell martin how to run his state or for him to to tell me how to run state is a little bit over the line from my perspective. the key is you believe what you believe in. we had elections. i didn't confused about what they were saying on the second day of november from the state of texas. they said we want learn, more efficient government. now, they may not have told martin that, but that's what they told us in texas. and i think that's what scott walker heard. my point is he knows what he
believes in, and he's expressing that. and the voters in wisconsin, they basically said this is the person that we want running the state. and, you know, man, that first amendment is a beautiful thing. and, you know, they're out there expressing their free will and what have you. >> but to get to the heart of the matter and to take a step back from just madison, too, we know in this room that, yeah, public employees and more broadly organized labor are a key element of the sort of democratic coalition. and in a lot of state parties it is the financial force, the force in terms of ground troops when it comes to election time. if governor walker succeeds here and is able, you know, in this legislation to sort of strip away the compulsive dues paying, that could be a real blow, governor o'malley, to organized labor and to democratic parties,
right? >> i think it would be a blow to a lot of things. i don't know any ceo in private industry who would take over an important corporation -- >> politics here, right? >> sure. there's lots of politics. there's politics in the fact that tax cuts for the wealthy are always pushed at the top of the republican agenda at a time when wealth has never been more concentrated in the hands of 1 president of our nation than -- 1% of our nation than it is now. not since 1931. but i think beyond that the importance of bringing people together in order to create jobs. i mean, the governor mentioned whether people -- what did people tell us in the midterm elections? i think it was two things. one was we need to be fiscally responsible, we need to reduce the size of government, but what i thought i heard was we need to create jobs. we need to make sure we make the right decisions and the tough decisions now so that we can create jobs in this new economy. and i don't think the drama and
the circus going on with this drive to eliminate unions, to punish unions, to take them off of, out of the political equation, i don't think that has anything to do with creating jobs. i don't think it helps to create jobs. and i don't think that it even helps to solve the problem of imbalances in pension systems. >> governor perry, do you want to jump on there? >> we can talk about job creation. we led the nation in job -- >> all right, do it. >> -- in texas since the entire decade of the 2000s. >> how. what'd you do? >> it's pretty simple, really. you don't have to go and have a ph.d. from harvard and political science to understand our economics, for that matter. you don't overtax. you keep a relatively low tax structure, you have a regulatory climate that is fair and predictable, you have a legal system that doesn't allow for oversuing, and you continue to have accountable public schools which basically says to the job creators, you've got a skilled work force there.
and that's what we put in place for a decade in the state of texas. and, you know, i argue and am quite proud of what we did in the state of texas. people vote with their feet. i mean, that's the beauty of the tenth amendment which we -- i've got to say, i really don't want washington, d.c. telling us how to run our business in the state of texas. i think it is very clearly stated in our constitution about the idea that the states have substantial powers, they are limited by the constitution. the tenth amendment is clear in giving the power to the states and having the federal government try to tell us how to deliver health care or how to educate our children or how to have energy policy is very foreign to me, and i think that -- i'll bet you martin doesn't want the federal government down here telling you how to run your state. >> governor? >> in a lot of ways. >> do you?
>> do i want the federal government telling me how to run my state? no, but i don't want the federal government to be shut down. i don't want the federal government to stop defending my country. i don't want the federal government to stop investing in the research, the development, the innovation, the education, the more affordable college that expands opportunity and creates jobs at a time when our whole world economy is changing. so i do believe there are some things, j. mart, that are so hard and so large that we can only hope to tackle together, and i think our federal government's an important part of doing that. there was an article in "the washington post" today about some of the things that we're going with regard to our health care waiver in order to bring down the high costs of health care. all of these things are the things that people expect us to do, managing for results, reducing spending so that businesses can be more successful, so instead of informing in -- investing in rising health costs, they can create jobs. and these are things that a
functioning, working government does. >> governor perry, i wanted to ask you about the federal stimulus because a lot of gop governors had some real concerns with that, and i think you were one of them. but a lot of states, including texas, used some of those federal dollars to fill budget holes. what was the impact of the stimulus for texas? >> well, before i address that, let me just say we take federal dollars, but last time i checked we send a whole bunch up there. as a matter of fact, we send more dollars to washington, d.c. than the state of texas gets back. we're what's called a donor state, and, you know, i will tell you, you don't want to be a donor state, sir. [laughter] it's not the good position. martin said something that was very important that i think i'd like for us to focus on just a moment, and it is that one of the main responsibilities of the federal government is to secure this country. and i think all of us realize that is one of the very
important things that the federal government does. my dad, a world war ii veteran, he said the federal government's supposed to do three things, boy. they're supposed to stand in military, and we to that. we have the finest young men and women defending our country around the world and here at home. and he said they're supposed to deliver the mail. [laughter] prefer my on saturdays and on time. -- preferably on saturdays and on time. you know, the key is i want to go back to the security issue. the state that i have the privilege to serve has a 1200-mile border are a foreign country -- with a foreign country, with mexico. we marry each other, we have, hell, they owned us at one particular time in our history. they're our number one trading partner. but today the mexican boarder is a war zone. border is a war zone. it's every bit as dangerous, i would suggest, as iraq.
we had another american citizen, happened to be a texan, who was killed this last week by the drug cartels. and our federal government, i can't get them to address what i consider to be and what our citizens to be one of the most important duties that our federal government has and that is defending the border against some very vicious thugs and terrorists, the drug cartels, etc. and i think it's going to get worse before it gets better, unfortunately. which really impacts our economy. so it's not just about the security of our people which is paramount. it's also about allowing this economy to continue to grow between two very important state and country. and can the rest of the -- and the rest of the united states. >> both of you governors are facing deficits in your state. governor o'malley, i want to start with you. what are you doing to close the deficit, and what has been the impact on job creation of the red ink that you're facing in
maryland? >> we have, we have gone time and time again in the course of this recession which has impacted every single state in our union, we've gone time and time again to either the legislature or our board of public works with more and more and more cuts. i think right now with the latest budget we've submitted we're up to $6.6 billion in cuts over the five years. we've eliminated some 4900 positions, all of our employees have had to endure furlough days for the last three years, and these are the things we're doing towards the end of making our state more competitive and creating jobs in this new economy. i guess one of the, the fiscal discipline is critically important, and without it no progress is possible. but i believe that fiscal discipline is a means to the end of expanding opportunities. the governor mentioned the fact that his father served in the second world war.
>> as did yours. >> mine did too. where were yours? >> yours was in the pacific, mine was in england. >> good stuff. [laughter] but those men came back to the country that invested in the g.i. bill, raised the education levels, expanded middle class opportunity in ways we never had before. >> right. >> those are some of the things we can do together that are not only the right thing to do morally for returning soldiers. and i just want to underscore this. not only have we made cuts, we've increased our investment in education, and we're the only state to go four years in a row without a penny's increase in college tuition. why do woe do those -- why do we do those things? because with we know our education levels are tied to our economic future. without the recovery and
reinvestment dollars, every state capital in our country would have crumbled. there is no way that we could have avoided a second great depression had it not been for the recovery and reinvestment act dollars that kept us from slipping in to the precipice. now, they were never designed to be a permanent -- >> right. >> -- thing. they were designed to bridge states. the governor used those dollars, i used those dollars, every state used those dollars in order to bring us into this better economy. >> right. >> now, every state is renowned for some sharp elbows when it comes to recruitment of employers and going after jobs. besides sporting events, it's probably sort of the, you know, most aggressive that you guys get when it comes to sort of going after each other. and, governor perry, you in particular targeted one state, and that's california, when it comes to going after jobs. and you go out there on hunting missions to try and find jobs. i think you've ticked off some
of the folks in california. there was a story from the l.a. times earlier this month that you may have seen about your efforts to go after california, and they are now turning the tables and saying for all of perry's critique of california, texas, it turns out, is having some problems too. and this is what the treasurer of california, bill, told the l.a. times about texas and texas' financial challenges right now. he said, quote: someone just turned the lights on in the bar, and the sexiest state doesn't look so pretty anymore. about texas. [laughter] so california's hitting pack here a little bit -- back here a little bit. >> and that's -- i don't have a problem with that at all other than it's wrong. [laughter] competition's good, that's the name of the game. and putting programs into place to make your state look more attractive. martin has maryland initiative, i mean, your technology -- >> the invest maryland?
>> that's a great concept. it is to try to entice either home-grown companies or companies to come from other places and we have what's called the emerging technology fund in texas. it's been highly successful. and the enterprise fund which has been around since 2003 in texas, and that's what we really used on california. i mean, listen, we're not picking on california, they're just such a target-rich environment for us to go -- [laughter] i mean, listen, they, i mean, brother, go out there. [laughter] let me tell ya, there's plenty to go around. [laughter] >> there's gold in those hills, huh? >> it is. it is a -- and that's the way you're supposed to. susana martinez, the new governor of new mexico, and i do, i don't try to offend people, but i'm very forward in challenging states to change the way that they do business so that their businessmen and women will stay in their state or will
expand in their state. i don't have a problem with that. and i'll give you one example of how new mexico was very successful in luring the film industry, because they had a film incentive. very, very successful. and we were losing people moving out of the state of texas to go to new mexico, and so we changed our film incentive to be more richer. it's not as big as new mexico has, but the fact is it doesn't have to be. people really like to live in austin, texas, or dallas or houston which is part of the center part of our film work. so those are supposed to work. you know, i don't mind whether it's martin or whoever it is, you know, being critical of texas, but at the end of the day facts are what matter. and there are more jobs created in the state of texas through the decade of the 2000s. people vote with their feet. and that's why i say the tenth
amendment's so important. let people, i mean, i may not agree with everything that martin does. i mean, some things i really do. and i don't mind coming, stealing those and taking them to my state and trying to put them in place. but in the end leave us alone is my message for the federal government. let us compete. and then the people will figure it out. they'll go where they want to go. they may want to live in maryland and enjoy the east coast and the great crab y'all have. >> one of the most attractive issues during the course of this recession does seem to be the unemployment rate. governor o'malley, i think it's about 7.4% in maryland. >> that's right. >> what can be done about this, what are you doing to try and bring down unemployment? obviously, the governor of maryland is very dependent on the federal government which helps ease the pain some, but, i mean, i assume that's not good enough for you, 7.4%. >> no, it's not good enough at all. the most important jobs we create in our state are the next
job, so everything we've been about ever since this recession hit us is about getting people back to work. i think every state has a different set of competitive advantages. the governor talked about some of those things in his state. we, too, have competitive advantages. >> what are yoursesome. >> some of our areas are life science, biotech, i., increasingly -- i.t., increasingly the joint cyber command ask things relate odd o that. also with the port of baltimore, we created 5700 jobs with mostly private money at the port of baltimore so that when the larger ships can pass through the panama canal, they don't pass by maryland. so we're engaged in global trade, we're engaged in the new jobs of the future, and we've also, we have also -- the governor talked about the proposal we had before the state legislature which is invest maryland. in essence, a way of replenishing our venture fund with $100 million allowing large entities, insurance companies to forward pay at a discount their
tax liability, and then we put that into the maryland venture fund for some of the start-ups and the entrepreneurial endeavors that are going on in our state. you know, the u.s. chamber of commerce named maryland one of the top two most innovation and entrepreneurship-friendly states in the country. mill kin institute ranked us second in life science and biotech, and the kaufman foundation ranked us in the top three in terms of being well positioned to be a winner in this changing new economy. so these are some of the things we're doing along with we did create a new hiring tax credit for any business, large, medium or small, that hires a marylander off the unemployment rolls, gets them back to work. we expanded our life sciences and biotech tax credits, we also extended our research and development tax credit, so these are some of the things we've done. >> there's a lot of discussion here in washington about health care reform -- >> and the new green motor that's being built by gm at white marsh.
>> there's a lot of talk in many washington about the health care legislation that was passed in the congress, of course, signed into law. but i want to ask you at a practical level as this law is implemented, what is the impact at the state level of the health care reform law? i know, governor o'malley, i want to start with you. >> well, over the next ten years we see us being able to avoid some $350 million -- $850 million in costs that we'd otherwise incur. but the bigger, the bigger hope, the great opportunity from if health care reform is that we'll finally get one of the most out-of-control and fastest-escalating costs off of the backs of our small businesses, our medium-sized businesses, all businesses. i mean, every year for the last 10, 15 years our businesses have been sending another 17%, 15%, 20% for health care coverage. and those are dollars that they cannot invest in their plant, that they cannot invest in
creating jobs, that they cannot invest in marketing their products abroad. so we believe that they're going -- there are going to be states that really embrace this and are at the forefront of implementing it. and we believe the states that do that will become far more attractive to all businesses and especially to those start-ups, those family-owned new entrepreneurial businesses. i think the states that resist it and fight it will have a very, very difficult time ever bringing health care costs down in their state. and that's really the goal here in terms of job creation. >> governor perry? >> i have looked for some time for a state that would actually say that the health care bill was good and it helped them. congratulations, you are the first. of. [laughter] and i say that with all due respect because our states are different. and the way that you are structured may be where long term it's good for you. let me tell you what it does to the state of texas. our calculation is over the next ten years it will cost the state
of texas over and above what we already pay for health care, $30 billion. i talked to a couple of new democrat governors over the course of the last two or three weeks. the maintenance of effort requirement the health care -- in the health care bill is devastating for a state like california. i talked to jerry brown, and, you know, i'm not going to put words in be jerry brown's -- but he recognizes the problem of that maintenance of effort portion of the bill. our solution from the standpoint of health care is, again, i get back to -- i can't find anything in the constitution that says that washington is supposed to tell us in texas how to deliver health care. and i've asked for -- and this isn't just the current administration, the previous administration wouldn't give us a waiver to allow us to be innovative, to look at different ways of which to -- i happen to
think that the states are the laboratory of innovation. if we -- >> agree. >> -- give martin or mary fallon in oklahoma the freedom to deliver health care to their own citizens, create insurance programs, create different programs of which people can pick and choose, that they can best come up with the ways to deliver health care. i mean, with all due respect to our friends in washington, d.c., they just cannot understand how to deliver health care in the vast areas, in the geographic and the culturally different areas of texas one shoe fitting all. it just won't work that way. >> both you governors are the chairs of your respective party committees, the dga and the rgea, so it would all be fitting to chat politics here for a little pit. you had a tough year last year,
governor o'malley. democratic governors -- i should say you had a great year. [laughter] >> thank you. >> beating governor ehrlich, it wasn't even close this time. but a lot of your colleagues didn't fare as well. why is 2011, why is 2012 when there are a handful of gubernatorial races, why is that going to be different for democrats than it was last year if we haven't seen unemployment nationally come downsome is. >> well, a big deal. as i, as i look add -- as i look at some of these leading indicators, it seems pretty apparent to me and also from the commentators i listen to on the news that most everybody agrees we're doing better now, our economy's doing better now than it was two years ago, than it was a year ago. and the big if there in your question is what the economy will be doing and will our people be going back to work in greater numbers by the next election? i think that we're going to continue to see our economy improve, but we have a long way to go.
but i do think that over the course of time, i think people will have a better opportunity to evaluate whether the president's call to outeducate, outinnovate and outbuild the rest of the world is really the way for america to go. historically, that has always been true, and i think it can still be true. and so i think there's a long time that will go by between now and the next election. but more importantly is this, in all of the states without the recovery and reinvestment dollars that you talked about, j. mart, people are going to see a strikingly different governing philosophy between the republican governors and the democratic governors. we all have to balance our budgets, but democratic governors do so in ways that protect the education of our people, that improve the skills of our people and to give our people a better footing in order to be winners in this changing new economy. >> there were a good number of governors, members of congress who did not want president obama with them on the campaign trail
last fall. you know that quite well. straight talk. with you are a governor of kentucky, a red-tinged state, do you want president obama for you this fall? is. >> i sure wanted him in maryland. and every governor will make their own decisions strategically, tactically on that. the president was a tremendous help to us in the maryland. his organization was a tremendous help to us. so every governor will make that decision. i think what all of us do want from the president, and i think democrats and republicans alike, is for him to be successful in getting our economy moving forward again and creating jobs. >> and, governor perry, you are chairman of the rega. looking to the future here for a minute, what is going to be the impact of having president obama on the ballot in 2012 in a lot of these gubernatorial races? >> i happen to think you're going to see a continuation of what occurred in november of 2010. >> why? >> and that is that individuals and individuals back in the
states truly believe that the massive amount of money -- and they correctly identify that that money that was spent didn't create the jobs that the president said they were going to do and, in fact, all it did was add to a monstrous debt load. one of the ing things that i've -- one of the things that i've seen across the country, particularly in texas, is that young people are coming back to the republican party because they're starting to understand that the debt that's been created by this administration is monstrous. and it is going to have to be paid off by them. you look at a guy that's my age, and, you know, i may be gone before that debt really becomes -- >> right. >> -- incredibly indelible in our country. but i think you're going to see a lot of young people coming back to the republican side of the ledger that were over voting
for president obama in '08. and it is going to be driven almost exclusively by their concern about the economy and what this administration has done to their ability to live free. >> how concerned, governor perry, are you about hispanics and the gop? you were really hurt in 2008 because they went for president obama overwhelmingly. are you concerned about your party's tone? about the sort of slipping of hispanics when it comes to the gop? >> i'm not. we do quite well -- >> you do. more broadly, the party. >> well, i think that the party can look at us and the hispanic population in the state of texas are, they're pro-life, they're very pro-family, hard working, patriotic folks, and we tell them you want to keep more of what you work hard for? republican party is where you need to be. and i think we're making great progress along those lines.
i stand up, and i talk about border security. listen, there are mexicans, there are 34,000 mexican citizens that have been murdered by the drug cartels since 2007. i mean, these are -- in a lot of cases in texas, family members are, they're losing people's lives in mexico. and what we're doing -- >> right. >> -- to help mexico and to help along the border, the hispanic population, certainly i think in the state of texas -- >> right. but, governor, you also had ads that you aired in spanish. your tone was a lot different than other folks in your party running in different states. >> um, i'm pretty blunt about people who try to draw and differentiate between people just by the way they look. i call 'em out on a regular basis. i mean, we're a very, i mean, my brother-in-law's hispanic. we marry each other. we do business with each other. so the idea that somehow the
republican party's not open and, frankly, i think very alluring looking to the hispanic population because as they become more educated, as they become more engaged in the great free market american experiment, they're going to go to the place where they get to keep more of which they work for, and that's, generally speaking, by republican administrations. >> may i say -- >> governor o'malley. >> may i say that i greatly admire that quality in governor perry, that he looks and sees the dignity in every individual, and he doesn't allow people to denigrate others because of their cultural background. >> thank you. >> i do have a difference, though, i mean, we're entitled to our differences of opinion. >> right. >> but we're not entitle today our own version of the facts here. by 2019, 55% of the federal deficit will have been driven by and created by -- 55% of it --
by bush-era tax cuts. tax cuts that primarily benefited the wealthiest 1 or 2% of americans in the first decade of our country since the second world war where wages actually stagnated and started to go down. 13% of that deficit will be driven by the series of ongoing desert wars that our nation has been fighting, and only 4% of it is driven by the recovery and reinvestment act, without which we would have plunged into a second great depression. so i disagree with the assertion strongly, and i think the facts bear it out, that the things president obama have done have driven this deficit. they were things that george bush did that took a surplus situation, a balanced budget by a democratic president, and drove it into the ground and put our country in a position of red ink with the cost of wars for the first time in our nation's history charged to our children's credit cards. >> i want to do some fast questions before we close. i have one last question myself,
for you, governor o'malley. you've been involve inside the dlc, the democratic leadership council, a moderate democratic organization for a few years. they've recently announced that they are going to be closing their doors. what happened to the dlc? and do you worry at all about the impact of their shuttering on moderation in your party? >> well, i think the dlc, i think when the democratic party has the presidency, i think it's harder for other groups to sustain themselves. and the dlc had a great run. i think that brought to our country and president clinton -- >> what happened? >> well, i think what happened was you saw a very successful administration in bill clinton's administration with security, responsibility, opportunity, all of the things that resonate across the board in our country, and every organization -- now, nothing lasts forever, and i think had -- think they had a
very good run and contribute add lot to this debate. i think the call of your question is what happens to moderate democrats? >> yeah. >> you see this in a lot of the newer-elected democratic governors. i think that the more, the more recently-elected democrats, the new generation of democrats, if you will, are fundamentally not ideological, but they are entrepreneurial and pragmatic in their approach to governance. so i think some of the tug-of-war in the party's change which was, i think, completed in a large degree generationally, anyway, with bill clinton -- >> right. >> i think those sorts of tensions philosophically are not as prominent as they were and, therefore, what we're all looking for are the things that work to create jobs, to get our people back to work -- >> they were a victim of their own -- >> no, were they a victim of their own success? i don't know. i don't consider anybody that's successful to be a victim.
>> if president obama is reelected in 2012, governor o'malley, would you run for president in 2016? >> no. [laughter] >> governor perry? governor perry, 2012? >> well, let me go back and -- [laughter] >> hold on, no. 2012, president? >> no. no, no. >> no? >> same answer it's been for the last year concern. >> okay, had to do it. >> he said something that's really important that i want to just defend for a moment. washington has been on a spending spree that i, frankly, think has been horrible for our country. and it goes back to the washington-centric concept of washington knows best. the idea that washington, d.c. needs to be telling martin how to educate his children in maryland is just, i just think it's nuts. i'm not a fan of no child left behind.
i don't think washington, d.c. should be telling you how to educate your children. i think that's your people and your innovative ways to do that. same thing on the health care, the big pharmaceutical bill. i mean, it was a huge, monumental debt that has been put on concern and, again, it comes back to washington d.c. one of my goals over the course of the next few years working with the republican governors and the democrat governors, frankly, because i think there are a number of governors in the, you know, sometimes in the quietness of our private conversations and maybe there's a little bit more heat to not speak out against a sitting president or a sitting party that's in power, but the fact is washington, d.c. is trying to tell all of us how to run our states with way too much spes fessty. and the cost of that is what is driving the deficits in this country. and if we would get back to a
substantially leaner federal government, do what you're supposed to do right, defend our borders. mr. president, come to texas and defend our border. then we might have a conversation about some of these other things that you're wanting to do like come into my state and take over our clean air permitting process. i mean, this drives me up the wall. we have had one of the great programs in the country. we cleaned up our air more than any other state in the decade of the 2000s. ozone levels down 27%, nitrous oxide levels down 50-something percent. and the everything pa -- epa, oh, i might add, while we're creating more jobs than any other the in the nation, but what we get is the epa coming into texas and can taking over our air permitting process. i don't understand that. that is the problem we have in america that we've got to address as a country and talk
about what is the proper role for washington, and isn't it costing us way too much money? >> we're going to take a few questions here before the governors have to run. from the audience. first one is both of you will appreciate this, how important is innovative technology in your states to job creation. governor o'malley? >> oh, it's key. some of the fastest areas of growth that we have as a state are in biotechnology and also cybersecurity. we were able to compete for and win a federal grant to expand broadband connections to -- and connect all 24 of our counties in our state. we believe that cyber, that cyber highway is really the key to the future, and so technology's at the center of our new economy. >> governor perry? >> um, well said. and, absolutely, the technology's going to -- in finding the cures for the
diseases. in 2005 i believe it was, 2007 we passed a $3 billion effort over a ten-year period of time to find the cures for cancer. again, it's those big ideas, it's those very innovative and all the spin-off that comes from that, the jobs that are created. so technology and, you know, whether it's in the energy field. we haven't talked about energy at all -- >> please. >> -- jonathan, and the fact of the matter is as we're seeing in the middle east and those areas, literally in flames. countries that have massive reserves of oil and gas. yet many this country -- yet in this country whether it's up in both of the dakotas and, i believe, the eastern side of montana, monstrous reserves that we are using our technology today, martin, to find the ways to not only discover it -- 15
years ago we had no idea there were just these tremendous reserves of natural gas in the three or four different locations in our country. bart letsville, the eagle ford formation down in south texas. and we're, through technology again, ways to extract it. so the idea that we're not giving tax creates and we're not giving incentives to domestic exploration of our natural resources is just beyond me. that ought to be one of the focuses i would suggest from our current administration as well to become more energy independent. but again, it's all driven by technology. and technology, you know, whether it's green jobs and cleaning up our environment, it's all in the innovative minds and, generally speaking, it's in the states. >> can i give a plug for
offshore wind? >> please. >> we're very focused on offshore wind. and we think one of the great renewable sources of energy that we have to capture, all mid atlantic states or atlantic states, is that offshore atlantic wind. so we're excited about pursuing that, and we've also done a number of things with technology to reduce energy consumption in our state and advancing green buildings and the technologies in terms of geodesign and green architecture and those sorts of things that cannot only improve the economy, but also spur jobs. >> i want to ask one last question, sort of coming back to where we began here this morning that's very much on the news. if we were to have this discussion ten years from now, sort of projecting forward, what will, do you think, then be the role of public employees, public employee labor issues in terms of states' government, state spending, state budget issues? governor perry? >> well --
>> what's going to happen here? >> i think that every state should be able to decide that themselves. and i hope ha we don't have a federal government -- i hope that we don't have a federal government that tries to inject themselves into the structure of our states. martin and i like to -- fraternity boys that are trying to maybe get elected fraternity president here, but wind energy, we have more wind energy in texas than any other state in the nation. [laughter] >> that's good competition. i want martin to be pushing me to create more incentives to get more wind energy. but the fact is, in ten years my dream is for the states to be substantially less tethered to a federal government that's telling us how to educate our children, create our own energy and transportation infrastructure or delivering our health care. to me, that's the beauty of what america's all about is competing against these states. and we've gotten away from that. and i don't think anybody doesn't recognize that
washington, d.c. has way too much influence and cost to all of us. >> governor o'malley? >> i think your question is ten years from now where will this be? >> yeah. what's the end game? >> i think right now we're coming out of, and we're not yet out of, but we're coming out of the worst recession our country's seen since the great depression. all of that impacted our revenues. what people want right now are for executives, whether they're mayors, county executives or governors, to focus on solving the problem so that we can move forward. and they also want people that are not ideological, they want people that are pragmatic that want to bring people together to find the things that work so that we can move forward. that's number one. number two, i do believe that people are hungry to understand how they and their families fit and make it in this new, changing economy. the states that win will be those states that can bring people together in this
temporary, temporary fiscal crisis and protect the priorities that allow their states to be big job creators as we transform into this new economy. i don't think ten years from now we'll look over our shoulders and say there were once unions here. >> yeah. >> once people had the freedom to organize and had their voices heard in collective bargaining. but that was all done away with in the most recent recession. i don't think that's going to happen. i think one of the reasons you see the public pushback on extremism and the ideology trumping problem solving in wisconsin is because people see it as fundamentally mean-spirited, ideological and fundamentally unfair. >> are public employees the scapegoat of the moment when people look for sort of rationales for this recession? >> yes. in times of scarcity, there's a great danger that any group of people suddenly become scapegoats. and for some governors instead of focusing on the problem, they focus on scapegoating public employees.
unless in the case of fire and police unions greater numbers of them are registered republicans or vote republican and then they're not so an reat them for organizing and having their voice heard. >> governor perry? >> well, we're a right- to-work state so in texas our public employees are pretty well thought of actually. i don't see the -- >> well, they're not -- >> they're not surrounding the capitol. >> teachers who are coming to austin -- >> look, we have people come to austin all the time. i mean, police come -- [laughter] we like them to be there and be interactive and go back and forth and express their desires. i mean, how boring would it be in austin, texas, if there weren't folks out in front with their signs up expressing -- >> love. >> that is. [laughter] my point is that our states, i keep going back like a broken record, but our states being able to compete against each other is, to me, that's going to
be the future of how strong america is. if we truly believe that the laboratories of innovation are in the states and that states are different and that people should be allowed to decide where they want to live, listen, california -- i go to san diego almost every summer between sometime in july and august. because, trust me, they got better weather than we have in texas. [laughter] and i'm sitting there, i'm thinking how can you screw this up so bad that people would leave this? [laughter] i mean, it is beautiful. and, but the fact is, it ought to be left to the states to decide those crucial decisions about taxes and regulation and what have you. and then let people decide where they want to live. >> well, i think we can all agree about california weather on a rainy day here in washington. so on that note we'll wrap it up. governor perry, governor o'malley, thanks so much for